If you ever want to look up bold, decisive leadership, a true reformer, and a friend of the taxpayers, not their campaign war chest, take a good look at Steve Fulop (picture below). After being sworn into office last month, Mayor Fulop rolled up his sleeves, threw caution to the wind, and began merging city departments, starting with combining the police and fire into one Dept. of Public Safety. Please Democrats, clone this guy, and spread him throughout the country. This guy, I hope, will be a future POTUS, one Democrat I would happily vote for.
This newly elected mayor of New Jersey’s second largest city (approx. 250,000 people) really puts to shame all the mayors and town managers in the entire state of Massachusetts, who are wedded to the status quo, just keeping the police and fire union brass fat, dumb, and happy, in exchange, for political support down the road.
Back in 1983, Kalamazoo, Michigan merged their police and fire and have not looked back since. Their experience shows improved response times and annual savings of 5%-10%. Kalamazoo, a city the size of Waltham, saves $6 million a year by having one Public Safety Department. Just imagine, if cities and towns all across America, including those here in Massachusetts, followed Mayor Fulop’s lead, and made such a bold proposal. Perhaps all these municipalities would stop waiving the tin cup every time Deval or any governor for that matter, needs to cut back on aid to cities and towns, or crying poor mouth to the property owners, and requesting Prop. 2 1/2 overrides.
Of course, the Police Dept in Jersey City initially objected, saying that they don’t talk to the Fire Dept, so merging would be a problem (I’m serious folks). Per usual, the Fire Dept. objects, simply doesn’t want to be cross-trained. Thankfully, the city council is supporting Mayor Fulop and full steam ahead with this reform, in a very union state, may I add. My guess is, this will spread throughout NJ, as politicians simply cannot overlook the cost-benefit of merging these two departments. Who will be the first politician to suggest such an idea in Massachusetts? Right, I wont hold my breath on that one, they all seem to be in the tank, sorry for being so pessimistic.
From my brief research, merging of these two departments has occurred primarily in cities and towns located in Michigan, but Scottsdale, AZ made this reform in 2011. Palo Alto, CA is also looking at it. Perhaps this is not applicable to major hubs like Boston or Chicago, but for the vast majority of municipalities across America, each mayor or city council/town manager should justify why they are not bringing their police and fire into the 21st Century, by having one, cohesive unit, while saving hundreds of thousands, or likely, millions of dollars each and every year AND improving response times to the people they serve. This should be a slam dunk, a no-brainer. Isn’t it sad to think that our elected officials in Massachusetts, need to follow NJ’s lead on this one. Then again, not really.
Get a good look at Democrat Mayor Fulop, a true reformer, not just words, like others we know. I am honored to write this diary about you, Mayor Fulop, and hope you will run for POTUS down the road.
http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2013/07/merging_of_jersey.html
http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Scottsdale-police-fire-departments-merging-to-save-money-116592603.html
http://www.minbcnews.com/news/money/story.aspx?id=862330#.Uf1Xvsu9KSM
…but don’t try to get them to do each other’s jobs. Yes they are both first responders in their way, but fighting fires and enforcing the law are two very different things.
How can other cities and towns cross-train their people, and actually improve their response times. Why is this not possible in MA? Why can Jersey City do this, but not here? Are the public employees in MI and Scottsdale Az and Jersey City, simply smarter than ours?
A Michigan city recently laid off 12 fire fighters and replaced them with public safety officers, who were cross-trained. Police in general, have no qualms doing both jobs, the push back is from the FD. Gee, I wonder why?
Why not begin the transition now? Im not saying layoff every fire personnel, but moving forward, all recently hired and new hires must go through cross-training of both jobs. Get out of this mindset that this is how we always done it, so end of discussion. This idea already works, what more do you need?
It’s an interesting idea. I wonder how the disparities between responses work, for example:
* Firefighters mostly respond to every call immediately (because the calls are intermittent and the fire department largely provides stand-by service as opposed to patrolling), police do triage and respond in order of importance.
* Cross-town response occurs in fire, with firefighters from one community often standing by for another community and sometimes even crossing borders to fight the same large fire. This doesn’t happen with police (nor would I think the public tolerate their officers responding to calls in other communities, nor would a suburban police officer making $40k want to respond to gun-related calls in an urban neighboring community which are normally handled by urban cops at $60k/year).
* In recent years – probably due to criticism of firefighters “sitting in the station all day” – firefighters have been trained and dispatched for 911 health calls. I’ve always wondered if responding to a heart attack is the best use of heavy equipment, though I’d be the first one to say “hell, yes” if it happened to me. Would this function continue in a combined department? If so, how would it be prioritized with police calls? Would a robbery in progress trump a chest-pain call?
I wonder if the Michigan and New Jersey communities which did this had a shortage of police officers the way many urban areas in Massachusetts do? In Springfield, certain calls are put far at the back of the queue – for example, there is no more traffic enforcement in the city, that is considered too low of a priority. A few years ago, when budgets were cut, the police chief stated that the department would no longer respond to house alarms and house burglaries. I do not believe the police even particularly investigate property crime (i.e. burglaries) in Springfield anymore. As far as I can tell, pro-active policing (i.e. patrolling) is something that isn’t routinely done anymore particularly when there are a lot of other calls. Would this laissez-faire migrate to the fire department?
Plenty of municipalities have done this in Massachusetts including Arlington and Woburn. Plenty in Illinois have as well. We looked into it when I worked as a summer fellow in the Daley administration and the transition cost on a large municipal scale was just too high, it would take awhile before the long term savings offset this costs. But it could work in smaller municipalities and cities of that size.
Remember, in many cases police and firefighters unions back Republicans and this is the kind of streamlining reform progressives favor while the lunch bucket types get mad. Scott Walker in his quest against public unions didn’t touch cops or firefighters, and Wisconsin statues are some of the most overpaid for their limited duties.
It’s not a good idea or a bad idea in a general sense, it really depends on the specific city and its needs. But I would love for you as other conservatives to continue to discuss urban policy, there could be good ideas from a center-right perspective but I’ve heard little from your side since Jack Kemp died.
I saw them working for ELiz Warren last year, a candidate I don’t think ever broke a sweat in her life. The same FD unions came out for Lynch.
Are you saying Arlington and Woburn have one Public Safety Dept? I seriously doubt it, anyone from there who can confirm this? Sharing the same dispatcher does not count as a consolidation.